If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Reply to Thread

Your Message

Please correctly re-type the phrase f o o t d o c t o r in the form box. Re-type it without the extra spaces and put the one space where it should be. We apologize for having to do this but this silliness helps slow the spammers.

Title:

Additional Options

Additional Options:

Automatically parse links in text

Topic Review (Newest First)

08-02-2004, 12:01 PM

EricHall

I agree, to a point. You can get all those things.

But you have to be watching a different series. CART (or is it OWR??) gives you some of this. I kind of like their "Push to Pass" feature, it makes for better racing. NASCAR is the ultimate in "we tell you what to build". They are even designing the "Car of the Future" for ALL the teams right now. Then there is the Speed World Challenge series that constrains you in different ways. Then there are all of the formula series, F3000, Star Mazda, Formula BMW, Toyo Atlantic... but most of these don't get the exposure or TV time. Plus, it is kind of like watching minor league baseball, it is good, pure baseball, but kind of boring because all the players come and go all the time and it is hard to identify with them as a team.
F1 is supposed to be the tip-top of car technology. They already limit some things in the name of safety, and it looks like they will limit other things in the name of saving money. But they will not limit things in the name of "better racing". They cannot admit to themselves that they DON'T have the best show in town. They are too arrogant for that. Don't get me wrong, those cars, teams and drivers are amazing, and I do love to watch them. But right now it is boring racing. The Ferrari domination will end some day, probably sooner rather than later. The media will ask MS again and again "what happened? Are you loosing your ability". But no, it will be that the other teams have finally pulled their heads out and produced cars that can compete. MS won't be able to win every race anymore, and it may get interesting from a racing perspective again.<html>
<body>
<br/>
======================================<br>Eric Hall<br>1994 740iL<br><font color=#000000><b>Schwarz / </b></font><font color=#b7ac9d><b>Pergament</b></font> 80k<br>Albany, OR<br>[email protected][remove.this.before.emailing]@tdsway.com<p/><i>No matter where you go... There you are!</i><br>Buckaroo Bonzai<p/><font face="Wingdings" size=2>€</font><font face="Wingdings 2" size=2>™</font><font face="Lucida Sans Unicode" size=3>=</font><font face="Wingdings 2" size=4>55</font><font face="Lucida Sans Unicode" size=3>=</font><font face="Wingdings 2" size=2>™</font><font face="Wingdings" size=2>€</font><p><br>BMWCCA #304714<br> Roadfly Inner Circle #48238<br></p><img src="http://members.roadfly.com/erichall/SigGraphic.gif" alt="">
</body>
</html>

08-01-2004, 05:21 PM

Jim Derrig 93 750

I'm not "proving" anything. YOU'RE

. . . trying to prove that MS is 0.5 secs a lap faster than everyone else in the field in an equal car. I maintain that such a statement is an exaggeration at best. All you can prove is that he's frequently faster than Barrichello in the same car, which is hardly the same thing.

YOU'VE changed to topic into whether he's "the best driver of his generation," an assertion I've never disagreed with.

It takes a lot more than pure speed to win races. Other drivers can match MS for pure speed--he does not have 0.5/sec a lap on JPM, KR, or even Trulli (a very fast and precise driver). He never had 0.5 sec/lap on Hakkinnen. What he has is racecraft, versatility, control, patience, and on and on and on. It the combination of all these things which make him exceptional.

His utter dominance this year has much to do with the F2004. I discussed RB's struggles with the car elsewhere in this thread.

08-01-2004, 11:28 AM

M3Richard

What is it that you are trying to prove here....

1- The RECORD (number of WDC's, # of wins, # of polls) all CLEARLY define MS as the best driver of his generation and as one of the best ever. As Casey Stingle said "you can look it up."
2- You then apparently argue that it's all the car and/or the tires and/or something. While having the best car and tires (supporting cast) certainly don't hurt, the "great" Rubins also has the best car and tires (and supporting cast) and it doesn't seem to help him much. MS is CLEARLY faster than Rubins in almost all cases.
3- One race, equal cars, you would you put money on?RichardM///3
Delaware USA
02'M36 Speed, 1/02 Build
Alpine White/Imola Red Leather
"Life is too short not to drive an ///M"

07-31-2004, 10:42 PM

tooloose

Wow, much insight into the Sport here (m)

I now have a slightly different view of today's F1 thanks to the many comments below, although my opinion hasn't changed. I think Jim Derrig 93 750 summed up my feelings best - "frightfully dull".

That said, it truly is a different and exciting kind of racing (in a different kind of way) than I remember it to be. It is interesting to see how tires can apparently give one team an advantage over the others. Also, it seems like Ferrari has got the pit strategy thing down to a science. I'm not convinced, however, that Schumi (by himself, without the Ferrari team behind him) is that much better than his fellow drivers.

This "science thing" is where I guess my biggest gripe is - there is very little art left to the Sport (at least as I remember it). The cars are "scientific" works of art, yes. The drivers have all sorts of aids to help them do faster circuits. The pit strategies are managed via computer. Tire manufacturers tailor a particular tire to a particular car. All what I consider scientific approaches to racing. A friend of mine made up a word for those instances where folks are way too serious about a particular thing in their life - he calls it Anality. I call F1's obsession with all things scientific "Anality". I think there are more rudimentary aspects of the Sport that are missing.

Such as what's wrong with trying to match up the car with a standard tire for all teams, so everyone has an equal chance at least as far as the tires go? And why can't teams let the driver loose with the car without any reach-backs to the pits except a radio? Just man and machine against man and machine. Turn off the electronic aids. Make the driver work the pedals, the shift lever (gasp! a lever not a button!) and the steering wheel to make the car go faster. Yes, I know some of you are thinking that Schumi has mastered this technological era better than anyone else. I agree. I just long for a simpler time, when drivers got out of their cars and you could still see the lines their goggles left on their faces. I'm getting old, I guess.

I'll still watch F1 because I'm a gear head and love all things automotive. And, again because of your comments, I will watch it differently now.

Thanks for listening - and sharing.

Ernie Peters
2000 steel grey 2.3 5spd

07-31-2004, 03:27 PM

Jim Derrig 93 750

that's a different question

I agree he's one of the best all time. I'd be an idiot not to agree.

But your initial statement was that in an equal car he's 0.5 sec/lap faster than everyone else. Can you admit that was an exaggeration?

"How is it that before pit stops (light tanks, worn tires) MS is nearly always faster than anybody else"

Well, I'd say it was because the Ferraristones are strongest at that point, while the Michelins are crap after 5 laps. The "schumi stalk" strategy is a direct outgrowth of the strengths of the recent Ferrari/Bridgestone vehicles. We didn't see it in, e.g., 1999 because MS didn't have the car to let him do it.

His "amazing" ability to put out fast laps after his opponent pits simply is an indication of how good the F2004 is after the Bridgestones take their set. He isn't churning out fast laps BEFORE that because there is no need to: he can lay back, take it easy on the equipment, not risk contact with the leader, and then open it up when the track is clear. Since he doesn't have to push the car hard, he has an amazing reliablity record.

What we are seeing this year is less amazing driving skill than a risk-mitigation strategy taken to the "nth" degree--The F2004 is so good he could win by 60 seconds, but instead he takes his time and wins by a carefully calculated 8 to 15.

It is frightfully dull.

"Then faster than everybody else on full tanks and new tires?"

He's not. JPM is clearly the best on full tanks and new tires. Kimi is at least as quick as MS under those conditions. Unfortunately, this year nobody's bothered to give them decent cars. If you put either of them in an F2004, MS would have his hands full every race. Do you seriously think he'd be creaming them at a rate of 0.5/sec a lap?

07-30-2004, 07:51 PM

M3Richard

Look at the basic facts....

1- Ferrari currently builds the best car
2- Bridgestone tires are better than Michelin (faster, more consistent)
3- I'm no fan of Ferrari OR MS, but facts are facts. We are witness to one of the 5 or 6 best F1 drivers of all time...the win record, the number of driver's championships & poll numbers all make the case.

It's all driver aids? Be real. Why is MS' doormat Rubins consistently slower? Becasue he's not as good, on a consistant basis. He OCCASIONALLY is a bit faster in qualifying or in a race- but only when he and his car are PERFECT and MS/his car are signficantly off (Reminder- I don't like Ferrari and their shameless team orders in rare events wthen Rubins is faster) but facts are facts. It's not superior set ups or dis-advantageous fuel strategies. Rubins just ain't good enough.

Rubins is like 15 or so drivers the the field- very, very good, but not a MS-level (the other 4 or so bought rides and are very decent, but there likely are others ou there as good, or better, only with smaller wallets). In an equal car to MS, Rubins almost always isn't fast enough and it's unlikely anyone else would be either.

Driver aids? How is it that before pit stops (light tanks, worn tires) MS is nearly always faster than anybody else? Then faster than everybody else on full tanks and new tires? When he needs the speed, it's always there. (Again, it's bush league that he'd rather pass in the pits v. on the track- but he IS faster).

Again, I don't care for MS but the reality is what we're seeing is like Michael Jordan on a basketball court, Lance Armstrong on a bike etc. etc. The guy is that good.RichardM///3
Delaware USA
02'M36 Speed, 1/02 Build
Alpine White/Imola Red Leather
"Life is too short not to drive an ///M"

07-30-2004, 05:50 PM

Jim Derrig 93 750

that's called opening a can of worms . . .

. . . cause then you get into Austria 2002 and other instances where MS's teammate has been shagged for the sake of the great MS. Seriously, other than Eddie Irvine, MS has not had a team mate who is capable of running with the top flight drivers. And Eddie was canned after his best year. Whether that's a coicidence or a direct consequence of MS's ego is a subject of much debate.

As for RB this year, I think his relatively poor performance is a direct result of the sub-optimum qualifying strategies he has been regularly saddled with. He's usually on the harder tires, with more fuel, and as a result he starts back in the pack and gets stuck in traffic. When he's managed to break free he's been reasonably competitive with MS speed-wise.

When I say "suboptimal" I mean that mathematically, its usually pretty clear what the best pit strategy is for a given car and track. MS gets the fast one; RB gets something else.

Why the suboptimal strategy implemented? Back to the can of worms. I can think of two reasons:

1. Ruebens is not as good a qualifier and the Bridgestones, though clearly superior as race rubber, do not heat up quickly enough for a flying lap. MS can still compete for the pole. RB cannot, and as a result some grid position is sacrificed to give him a better shot at coming in second.

2. Now that team orders are banned, Ferrari is making sure RB cannot challenge MS for the lead, but is well place to fulfill his role of getting WMC points. The effort thus is to separate them on the grid by running very different strategies.

One good question: Given Ferrari's huge budget and obviously superior machines, why doesn't Ferrari pick up drivers that are obviously more talented than poor Reubens? Anybody think Fisichella preferred Sauber? Why is the second-best seat in F1 occupied by Ruebens Barrichello?

07-30-2004, 05:32 PM

Jim Derrig 93 750

And you haven't proved he's ON HIS OWN . . .

. . . 0.5 secs/lap faster than every other driver out there. You made the claim. The burden of proof is on you. So what proof do you have?

I suppose it comes down to personal opinion, but in this driver-aids era of F1, I do not believe any driver is worth 0.5 seconds a lap, at least when you are talking the top 6-8 drivers. Too much margin for error has been eliminated by the electronics.

07-30-2004, 04:08 PM

EricHall

Re: why is MS always winning when there is

I guess my point was twofold. 1) It takes a team 2) It takes a great driver. Your post made it sound like MS is the only one who could possibly be pulling this off (of course he is the ONLY one doing it now, but my position is that it wouldn't be happening if the team and the car were not at the same level). All F1 drivers are extremely good at what they do. But it still takes that rare combination of a great driver, great car, great team, and a whole lot of luck to be champions. Now, don't get me wrong, luck does you absolutly no good if you are not in a position to take advantage of it. The Ferrari team and more specifically, MS, is always ready to take advantage of the situation. That is ONE of the things that makes him great. Put any of the great drivers from history into his car at this point in time with his team and all the other teams falling flat on their collective faces, and that driver would be doing what MS is doing.
Consistency is another of MS's strengths. And we all know that RB is not quite as fast on a consistent basis as MS is and although he is on the Ferrari team, he doesn't get quite the same level of support as MS does.
If you put me in that car, you could probably hear me screaming over the sound of the engine and then a loud bang as I hit the wall :-)<html>
<body>
<br/>
======================================<br>Eric Hall<br>1994 740iL<br><font color=#000000><b>Schwarz / </b></font><font color=#b7ac9d><b>Pergament</b></font> 80k<br>Albany, OR<br>[email protected][remove.this.before.emailing]@tdsway.com<p/><i>No matter where you go... There you are!</i><br>Buckaroo Bonzai<p/><font face="Wingdings" size=2>€</font><font face="Wingdings 2" size=2>™</font><font face="Lucida Sans Unicode" size=3>=</font><font face="Wingdings 2" size=4>55</font><font face="Lucida Sans Unicode" size=3>=</font><font face="Wingdings 2" size=2>™</font><font face="Wingdings" size=2>€</font><p><br>BMWCCA #304714<br> Roadfly Inner Circle #48238<br></p><img src="http://members.roadfly.com/erichall/SigGraphic.gif" alt="">
</body>
</html>

07-29-2004, 01:30 PM

dill003

why is MS always winning when there is

another ferrari on the track? Not saying you are wrong, but in all seriousness, it takes a great driver like MS to take a great car to victory. Put me in that ferrari and you better have the helicopter ready to fly me to the hospital, I bet I'd turn it into shrapnel against a wall. Yes, it takes a seriously good team, and a seriously good car, and on top of it all, a seriously good driver.

Chris

07-28-2004, 08:09 PM

EricHall

Re: the AMLS race was awesome. JJ Lehto said,

Yes, the Labo's sounded cool, but they sure did not run well at Portland. They corner like SUV's compared to the other GTS cars. I actully thought that the Panoz sounded really cool. Too bad the car broke and he did the spin thing (Right in front of where I was at, we heard a SNAP, the car spun and the smoke leaked out). I wanted to watch him a bit more.
I hope ALMS can expand the field a little bit. They need at least 3 more P1's, three more P2's, and a host more GTS cars. Then there would be some serious racing. I have to admit watching JJ fight back three times in the Audi was great racing. That Audi is an amzing car, so smooth and very quite. It would sneak up on you and go wizzing past before you knew it was there.
The SWC races were great too. <html>
<body>
<br/>
======================================<br>Eric Hall<br>1994 740iL<br><font color=#000000><b>Schwarz / </b></font><font color=#b7ac9d><b>Pergament</b></font> 80k<br>Albany, OR<br>[email protected][remove.this.before.emailing]@tdsway.com<p/><i>No matter where you go... There you are!</i><br>Buckaroo Bonzai<p/><font face="Wingdings" size=2>€</font><font face="Wingdings 2" size=2>™</font><font face="Lucida Sans Unicode" size=3>=</font><font face="Wingdings 2" size=4>55</font><font face="Lucida Sans Unicode" size=3>=</font><font face="Wingdings 2" size=2>™</font><font face="Wingdings" size=2>€</font><p><br>BMWCCA #304714<br> Roadfly Inner Circle #48238<br></p><img src="http://members.roadfly.com/erichall/SigGraphic.gif" alt="">
</body>
</html>

07-28-2004, 07:03 PM

EricHall

Re: there is an advantage alright, MS driving

Nobody is "just that good". No one person wins these races. It starts with the engineers and the management. It goes through the testers and the builders. Then it gets in the hands of the mechanics, pit crews and drivers. Yes MS is one of the all-time best, but if he were driving the Williams car right now, he would NOT be winning all the races. Plain and simple. You put any of the other top drivers in his car with the support that he gets from his team, and they will win races. Maybe not as many as MS, but they will win.
Look at it this way, JP is fighting a bad car all the time. MS drives the perfect line, every time. And how can he do that? Well, you got me, he's good. But he wouldn't be able to do that if his car didn't stay under him. He just thinks it into the corner and it is there. In other words, it points where he steers. JP is all over the track, fighting to drive the perfect line. He has to man-handle the car to get it to do anything. To stay on the perfect line, he has to get lucky. The car will just happen to hook up at the right time on that lap. The next lap, it doesen't and he has to fight to not eat a wall. These guys are on the absolute edge of control all the time. If that edge is jagged, you never know exactly what is going to happen. I think MS gets a car every week that he knows exactly what it is going to do. Plus, MS most likely is very good at communicating what is not exactly perfect to his crew so it can be fixed. I am not so sure JP is as good in that arena, but that is just speculation.
Sorry about the rant, I just felt like being verbose. :-)<html>
<body>
<br/>
======================================<br>Eric Hall<br>1994 740iL<br><font color=#000000><b>Schwarz / </b></font><font color=#b7ac9d><b>Pergament</b></font> 80k<br>Albany, OR<br>[email protected][remove.this.before.emailing]@tdsway.com<p/><i>No matter where you go... There you are!</i><br>Buckaroo Bonzai<p/><font face="Wingdings" size=2>€</font><font face="Wingdings 2" size=2>™</font><font face="Lucida Sans Unicode" size=3>=</font><font face="Wingdings 2" size=4>55</font><font face="Lucida Sans Unicode" size=3>=</font><font face="Wingdings 2" size=2>™</font><font face="Wingdings" size=2>€</font><p><br>BMWCCA #304714<br> Roadfly Inner Circle #48238<br></p><img src="http://members.roadfly.com/erichall/SigGraphic.gif" alt="">
</body>
</html>

07-28-2004, 12:41 PM

M3Richard

You do not disprove anything by citing the except-

ion. On a CONSISTENT basis, MS and the Ferrari are fastest. Can someone OCCASIONALLY string to together a fast lap and win the poll. Yup. JPM last week was a good example of a driver being almost as fast in qualifying but the car (and driver?) could not sustain that performance for more than a lap or two. Over a race distance, lap after lap, there's no contest. I'm no fan of MS or the "overdog" Ferrari team, but they are what they are.RichardM///3
Delaware USA
02'M36 Speed, 1/02 Build
Alpine White/Imola Red Leather
"Life is too short not to drive an ///M"

07-27-2004, 10:12 PM

arfboo

you have to suck it up...

it was the same when Mclaren was dominant and when Williams was laying waste to the competition. Sadly Rubens sucks and there is not going to be another driver tha can race a Ferrari against Schumi, so untill the other teams get their act together it's going to be what it is. But boring? nah never.<p align=center>
<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/booboo/.Pictures/axis.jpg"height=180 width=180">
<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/booboo/.Pictures/coupe.gif"WIDTH=180 HEIGHT=120>
<img src="http://www.corriere.it/Media/Foto/2003/08_Agosto/21/loghini/milan1.gif"ALIGN=CENTER>
</p>

07-27-2004, 12:31 PM

996carl

did i say that?

go back and read my post.
formula one is one big parade. there is very little racing. the drivers have incredible skill, and the technology is incredible. in spite of all those great ingredients, the racing action on the track sucks because there are a handful of moves per race. i would like to see more on track action where you actually get to see the drivers competing more directly with each other.

07-27-2004, 11:39 AM

dhabes

To a point SWC Touring is similar...

I find it incredibly interesting to watch Bill A. race with 200+ REWARDS weight and still win. Now they add 100lbs and reduce 500 rpms and that is just kickin the $hit out of the BMWs. I agree that sucks. But at the same time it is also extremely intense and exciting cus you dont know what is gonna happen the next turn and there are always 5 different makes battling in the top 10.

I agree F1 is fun to watch in that the cars are amazing and M Schumi is amazing, but I find the closeness of SWC must more fun to watch.

07-27-2004, 11:03 AM

Mark in Seattle

Quite a few accidents, but not racing

I don't think Carl is ignorant - he's pointing out what is clear to all of us - for 2+ years there has been very very little competition for first place. And it's not even close. And in the RARE occasions when MS isn't in first place, he usually gets there through pit strategy.

How many times in the last few years has someone passed on the track to take the race lead? Not very many times, that's how many.

It's like watching a chess game. Yes, chess is demanding, and yes these people do it very very well. It's just not all that fun for me to watch.

I'd be just as bored (I think) if Williams were as dominant as Ferrari is. Lastly, I am not advocating artificial field leveling (like added penalty weight).

I have no solution other than wait and hope for real racing for second-third while pretending that MS is in some other division.

07-26-2004, 07:06 PM

arfboo

no racing in F1? you mean no accidents?

For one thing only a moron would drive an open wheel car like a sedan.... doorbanging is entertaining but to say there is no racing or minimizing what these guys do is plain ignorant.<p align=center>
<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/booboo/.Pictures/axis.jpg"height=180 width=180">
<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/booboo/.Pictures/coupe.gif"WIDTH=180 HEIGHT=120>
<img src="http://www.corriere.it/Media/Foto/2003/08_Agosto/21/loghini/milan1.gif"ALIGN=CENTER>
</p>

07-26-2004, 04:35 PM

tooloose

Re: spec series vs. developmental series

"And yes, it makes for damned dull racing sometimes. F1 is in an economic and technical dead end, in which the more $ it spends the less interesting it becomes on Sunday mornings."

I noticed the stands at the Hockenheimring had a lot of empty seats yesterday. I guess it becomes less interesting not only for those watching on the tube but also from the stands.

Ernie Peters
2000 steel grey 2.3 5spd

07-26-2004, 03:00 PM

dill003

I think F1 is the most fair form of motorsport

outside of single car series like porsche supercup. The reason being is that they don't put restrictions, or change rules, just because one team is dominating.

To put it another way, what if the NBA had said that Michael Jordan was only allowed to play 1/3 of each game because he was so good? Or if Sammy Sosa could only bat twice each game because he was so good. How fair would that be? Sure, it would increase "competition" because they would be stifling the winners. Maybe thats what you would prefer to see in other sports as well, winners getting taken down artificially.

Chris

This thread has more than 20 replies.
Click here to review the whole thread.